WormBase-Caltech Weekly Calls

From WormBaseWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search

Previous Years

2009 Meetings

2011 Meetings

2012 Meetings

2013 Meetings

2014 Meetings

2015 Meetings

2016 Meetings

2017 Meetings


GoToMeeting link: https://www.gotomeet.me/wormbase1


2018 Meetings

January

February

March

April

May


June 7, 2018

Alliance literature pipeline working group

  • Has anyone gotten back to Carol Bult about WB/Textpresso membership in the group? Not yet
  • Paul & Kimberly can join; Kimberly will sit in on group meetings

SPELL migration

  • SGD put SPELL into the cloud; will give us code to set up WB SPELL in cloud
  • Want to have common interface but two instances (yeast & worm)
  • Worm data in SPELL may be more complicated than the yeast data (different species, platforms, meta data, etc.)
  • Mike Cherry proposed to use GTEx to replace SPELL. (www.gtexportal.org)
  • Trying to get GTEX to have same functionality as SPELL

Progress report

  • Wen can generate numbers of changes since last year
  • 5-year progress report coming up (for funding agencies)
  • Want a progress report-like document to give to SAB in July
  • WS259 - WS265

Paper author name

Lab class

  • Lab data is not clean/consistent; has gotten messy
  • Cecilia trying to clean it up
  • There is conflicting data from lab class, author class, and person class
  • Currently there is a ~redundant curation pipeline; considering pulling person info into lab class
  • When looking at lab page, if there is a problem with a person's info, changes would be made (requested) in the person class, not the lab class
  • Cecilia will contact labs to ask about correctness of information
  • Can have a discussion with Ann and Aric at CGC

How many C. elegans genes have "good" knockouts?

  • Paul giving talk next week, wants to report
  • Chris will look into
  • Mitani did 1,000 deletions in last year

Server logs

  • SimpleMine logs are all coming from Amazon; will need to ask Todd about SimpleMine usage (from AWS stats?)

Migration of lab data

  • Data for labs was coming from Name Server (in Hinxton) - Comment:[PD] Not coming from the Nameserver, geneace was the only source of Lab data prior to handover.
  • Now Paul D has stopped curating lab info - Comment:[PD] Build config has been updated to take the majority of lab data from citace rather than geneace
Database        File                                    Class                   remove/format 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
db=geneace      file=geneace_Laboratory.ace             class=Laboratory        format="Alleles WBVar\d{8}"     delete=Representative   delete=Registered_lab_members   delete=Past_lab_members delete=Allele_designation       delete=Strain_designation       delete=Address
db=citace       file=caltech_Laboratory.ace             class=Laboratory        delete=Alleles  format="Representative WBPerson\d{1,5}" format="Registered_lab_members WBPerson\d{1,5}" format="Past_lab_members WBPerson\d{1,5}"
  • Now that Cecilia is curating, will pull lab info from Postgres


June 21, 2018

SAB

  • Lightning talks at project meeting; everyone should consider what they want to present (5 minutes with 5 minutes for questions)
  • 45 minutes curation talk to SAB; Chris volunteered; anyone else interested?
  • What data types are being incorporated with the Alliance? What have we gained from those conversations?
  • How have Alliance interactions benefited us?
  • How does the Datomic migration affect our curation and data models?
  • Alliance data models should be union of existing MOD data models, but does not require curation of all attributes at each MOD
  • Do WB and our users benefit from creating a ?Genotype class?

Phenotype & Disease Face-to-Face

  • Reviewed phenotype curation practices at each MOD
  • Discussed strain and genotype classes
  • Generally it's felt that genotypes should only represent full genotypes of actual individuals or strains
  • For phenotype annotations WB will still need a mechanism to attribute the specific genotypic components that are responsible for the observed phenotype along with a way to capture the complete or background genotype for context
  • MGI considers strains to be part of a genotype (i.e. background inbred strain into which alleles are introduced)
  • WB and SGD consider genotype to be part of strain
  • WB will still consider moving ahead with instantiating a ?Genotype class for capturing genotypes (e.g. for disease models) that don't have an explicitly reported strain name; also for capturing transient genotypes like heterozygosity as well as paternal and maternal contributions/genotypes